Despite the successful search by Silicon Valley billionaires to find a few students to front a lawsuit to scuttle due process rights for public school teachers in California, the lawyers in the Vergara lawsuit never mention anything about the root causes of the differences in rich, not so rich, and poor schools in the state. It’s not in their best interests to do such a thing.

Tenure, due process rights, has nothing to do with whether the teachers in any given school are competent. Age has not much to do with it, although experience does factor in, as does the fact that young teachers, fresh out of credential programs, cost substantially less than more experienced teachers. Gender isn’t part of it either. Location does factor in.

Curriculum isn’t that big of a deal either, no matter how pretty the package is. Curriculum has a shelf life of about 3 years before someone re-packages it, throws a different name on it, and uses whatever the eduspeak-du-jour is to explain it, and then sells it to the boys and girls at the State Dept. of Education in Sacramento.

When you take the time to get past the smoke and mirrors and deliberate distractions of Vegara, actually look at the reasons behind students who either lag behind or outright fail, you find a group of problems that aren’t easily solved, but must be if children really are going to get equal treatment in school.

Because these issues are difficult and complex and don’t lend themselves to sound bite wonderment on the news shows you don’t generally hear of them. The fix entails money, extraordinary long term commitment and an understanding of how economics has such a deep impact on learning in this country.

There must be an understanding that high priced outside consultants, who rake in millions, do not have answers that will solve much of anything. Do your own research and find one that has. Good luck.

This is a long term, deep problem that will not be fixed quickly. As Newark, New Jersey found out, attempting the wholesale overhaul of the public system, firing staff, paying big money to consultants, expecting immediate results, doesn’t work. Ignoring parents, junking neighborhood schools, expecting people who have little or no connection to the community, or education in general, to make positive changes, is lunacy.

In an article in the Sacramento Bee, December 27, 2015, Paul Hefner, wrote a column “End child poverty, improve education.” In the article, Hefner points out the obvious. Poverty is the major component in failing schools and districts. He states, correctly I think, that “…we all like low cost solutions–preferably ones that lend themselves to poll-tested sound bites.” Anything that gets into the mud doesn’t qualify.

Slashdot recently posted an article about a turn around in a school district that was in dire straights. Tiffany Anderson, Superintendent of the 3,000 pupil Jennings School District in Jennings, a small city just outside St. Louis, has led an interesting turn around in that district. Her realization, which again isn’t rocket science, is that hungry and tired children don’t learn very well.

How did that happen? She has focused on poverty, “above all else.” The school district “…has taken unprecedented steps, like opening a food pantry to give away food, a shelter for homeless students, and a health clinic.”

The children and district are out of the basement, and doing much better. The only amazing part of that is that it’s somehow “news”.

It’s difficult for children to learn when they are hungry, cold, unsure of where they will spend the night, or how they will spend the night, or who they will be with, no matter their age. Until abject poverty is taken out of the question, the gaps in learning will persist. It’s not rocket science.